This is something I'd be happy to help out with.
On 30 November 2012 11:48, Johan Tibell wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> I will try to find some time to set up a automatic run of nofib on my
> buildbot (which is powerful enough) and have it graph the results over
> time (and perhaps even email us when a b
I can also offer a decently spec'd linux x86_64 machine, and a
functional OS X x86_64 Mountain Lion machine too. If possible I'll
offer my ARMv7 board as well, which currently fails late in the stage2
build on DPH. I haven't figured that one out just yet. All these can
all be available on a regular
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 09:38:10AM -0800, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
> wrote:
> > If Bryan and Johan are the Performance Tsars the future looks bright. Or at
> > least fast. Thank you.
>
> If someone could point me to the build bot script that we r
> Bryan O'Sullivan writes:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Johan Tibell wrote:
> I will try to find some time to set up a automatic run of nofib on my
> buildbot (which is powerful enough) and have it graph the results over time
> (and perhaps even email us when a benchmark dips).
>
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
wrote:
> If Bryan and Johan are the Performance Tsars the future looks bright. Or at
> least fast. Thank you.
If someone could point me to the build bot script that we run today
that would be a great start.
-- Johan
_
If Bryan and Johan are the Performance Tsars the future looks bright. Or at
least fast. Thank you.
Simon
From: Bryan O'Sullivan [mailto:b...@serpentine.com]
Sent: 30 November 2012 16:53
To: Johan Tibell
Cc: Simon Peyton-Jones; glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Subject: Re: GHC Performance Tsar
Hi,
Am Freitag, den 30.11.2012, 12:28 + schrieb Simon Marlow:
>
> Static by default, GHCi is dynamic:
> * fast code and compiler
> * GHCi bugs are fixed, no maintenance problems
> * binaries not broken by library updates
> * we have to build packages twice in Cabal (but can improve GH
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> At the moment, I do not see how dynamically built
> Haskell programs are in the interest of our user.
>
They do offer the prospect of fixing some annoying bugs for free, by
offloading them to existing, working system infrastructure. For i
On Fri, 2012-11-30 at 08:48 -0800, Johan Tibell wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> I will try to find some time to set up a automatic run of nofib on my
> buildbot (which is powerful enough) and have it graph the results over
> time (and perhaps even email us when a benchmark dips).
You might be interested i
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Johan Tibell wrote:
>
> I will try to find some time to set up a automatic run of nofib on my
> buildbot (which is powerful enough) and have it graph the results over
> time (and perhaps even email us when a benchmark dips).
>
I'll pitch in with this too.
Hi Simon,
I will try to find some time to set up a automatic run of nofib on my
buildbot (which is powerful enough) and have it graph the results over
time (and perhaps even email us when a benchmark dips).
-- Johan
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing li
On Fri, 2012-11-30 at 15:51 +, Tim Watson wrote:
> Could we not configure travis-ci to run the benchmarks for us or
> something like that? A simple (free) ci setup would be easier than
> finding a pair of hands to do this regularly I would've thought.
AFAIK Travis uses some IAAS service (EC2 i
| Could we not configure travis-ci to run the benchmarks for us or
| something like that? A simple (free) ci setup would be easier than
| finding a pair of hands to do this regularly I would've thought.
Of course automation is great. The pair of hands is still needed to figure out
what to do, se
Could we not configure travis-ci to run the benchmarks for us or something like
that? A simple (free) ci setup would be easier than finding a pair of hands to
do this regularly I would've thought.
On 30 Nov 2012, at 14:42, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> | > While writing a new nofib benchmark tod
Hi,
a bit late but here are my comments:
- my main (and in a way ``only'') concern is speed. At some point I'd
like my programs to consistently beat the pants off C ...
This won't happen soon, but when comparing to C it makes a difference
being able to say Haskell is x1.3 slower or x1.4 slo
Oh, PLEASE people. Let's not have another round of bikeshedding about
this AFTER the feature is already implemented!
-Brent
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 01:25:27PM +0100, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
> Jon Fairbairn writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > “\case” complicates lambda, using “of” simply breaks “cas
| > While writing a new nofib benchmark today I found myself wondering
| > whether all the nofib benchmarks are run just before each release,
I think we could do with a GHC Performance Tsar. Especially now that Simon has
changed jobs, we need to try even harder to broaden the base of people who
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:28:41PM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> Static by default, GHCi is dynamic:
> * still can't do this on Windows
We can do it on Windows: We can use side-by-side assemblies.
(well, assuming we fix #5987).
Thanks
Ian
___
Gla
Simon Marlow writes:
[...]
> Perhaps we should look again at the option that we discarded: making
> -static the default, and require a special option to build objects for
> use in GHCi. If we also build packages both static+dynamic at the
> same time in Cabal, this might be a good compromise.
>
On 27/11/12 14:52, Ian Lynagh wrote:
GHC HEAD now has support for using dynamic libraries by default (and in
particular, using dynamic libraries and the system linker in GHCi) for a
number of platforms.
This has some advantages and some disadvantages, so we need to make a
decision about what we
Jon Fairbairn writes:
[...]
> “\case” complicates lambda, using “of” simply breaks “case … of …”
> into two easily understood parts.
Just some observation (I'm rather late to the lambda-case discussion, so
this might have been already pointed out previously):
if the reserved keyword 'of' was t
On 30/11/12 03:54, Johan Tibell wrote:
While writing a new nofib benchmark today I found myself wondering
whether all the nofib benchmarks are run just before each release,
which the drove me to go look for a document describing the release
process. A quick search didn't turn up anything, so I th
22 matches
Mail list logo
